MSGID: 1:317/3 646ee48c   
   PID: hpt/lnx 1.9.0-cur 2019-01-08   
   TID: hpt/lnx 1.9.0-cur 2019-01-08   
    'Second-guessing' is a hard-wired behavior    
      
     Date:   
         May 24, 2023   
     Source:   
         University of Utah Health   
     Summary:   
         Have you ever made a decision that, in hindsight, seemed   
         irrational? A new study with mice, which could have implications   
         for people, suggests that some decisions are, to a certain extent,   
         beyond their control.   
      
         Rather, the mice are hard-wired to make them.   
      
      
         Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIN Email   
      
   ==========================================================================   
   FULL STORY   
   ==========================================================================   
   Have you ever made a decision that, in hindsight, seemed irrational? A new   
   study with mice, which could have implications for people, suggests that   
   some decisions are, to a certain extent, beyond their control. Rather,   
   the mice are hard-wired to make them.   
      
   "This research is telling us that animals are constrained in the decisions   
   they make," says Christopher Gregg, PhD, a neurobiologist at University   
   of Utah Health and senior author of the study that recently published   
   in iScience.   
      
   "Their genetics push them down one path or another."  Gregg and his   
   research team started investigating decision-making after noticing mice   
   repeatedly making what appeared to be an irrational decision.   
      
   After finding a stash of hidden seeds, rather than staying put to eat   
   them, mice kept returning to a location that had food in it the day   
   before. Only on this day, the original location was empty.   
      
   "It was as if the mice were second-guessing whether the first location   
   really had no food," Gregg says. "Like they thought they had missed   
   something."  To Gregg and the study's co-authors, the behavior didn't   
   make any sense. The animals ended up eating less because of the time   
   spent continuously returning to the empty food patch. If that kind of   
   behavior causes mice to eat less in the wild, it could spell trouble,   
   Gregg explains, because not getting enough calories can be detrimental   
   for a mouse.   
      
   The real surprise came after discovering that mice lacking a specific gene   
   didn't "second-guess" where to go and instead were more likely to stay   
   and eat the food they found. As a result, they consumed more calories   
   overall. This was the first evidence the scientists found that genes   
   could bias decision-making, even decisions that did not seem logical,   
   at least to a human. In this case, the gene Arc appeared to be important   
   for compelling the mice to continue searching for food even when it   
   didn't appear to be necessary.   
      
   "We all have a clear sense of what it is like to second-guess something,   
   but who would have thought that this type of behavior could be so   
   profoundly affected by one gene?" says Cornelia Stacher- Ho"rndli,   
   PhD, neurobiologist and co-author. "This raises the question, are other   
   cognitive biases under genetic control?"  Decoding behavior To the human   
   eye, a mouse's life seems pretty simple. When placed in a naturalistic   
   setting in Gregg's lab, they left home, explored their surroundings,   
   searched for food, ate a little, and made stops back home in between. But   
   the view looked quite different after a machine learning algorithm   
   deconstructed their journeys.   
      
   A custom program built by Gregg and study co-author Jared Emery analyzed   
   1,609 foraging excursions and saw that the mice repeated 24 behavior   
   sequences over and over. As the mice foraged, they strung together the   
   sequences like building blocks, interspersing them with spontaneous   
   behaviors to construct more complex behavior patterns. One of them was   
   the second-guessing behavior. "To a certain extent, you could predict   
   the future," Gregg remarks.   
      
   That future changed for mice missing the gene, Arc. Six of the 24 behavior   
   sequences were altered, and together, those differences short-circuited   
   the second-guessing behavior. Previous research had shown Arc is   
   involved in learning and memory. But overall, analysis showed that the   
   mice's memory -- and their other behaviors -- were largely intact. The   
   implication is that the effect on those six behaviors was specific.   
      
   "One intriguing idea is that the animals evolved to make those decisions   
   because they were somehow advantageous in the wild," Gregg says. He   
   explains one possibility: when mice go back and forth to evaluate previous   
   food locations, it helps them create a mental map. And that might help   
   them find food faster the next time around. "Genetically controlled   
   cognitive bias may allow for effective decision-making during foraging,"   
   he says.   
      
   The question remains, is there a biological basis for other types of   
   cognitive bias? And could genes guide decision-making in humans? More   
   research will tell.   
      
   "I believe that this research is foundational for a new field that we   
   are calling 'decision genetics,'" Stacher-Ho"rndli says.   
      
       * RELATED_TOPICS   
             o Mind_&_Brain   
                   # Behavior # Consumer_Behavior # Huntington's_Disease #   
                   Psychology # Nutrition_Research # Social_Psychology #   
                   Psychiatry # Child_Development   
       * RELATED_TERMS   
             o Illusion_of_control o Microeconomics o Psycholinguistics   
             o Macroeconomics o Thought o Social_psychology o   
             Anchoring_bias_in_decision-making o Culture_of_fear   
      
   ==========================================================================   
   Story Source: Materials provided by University_of_Utah_Health. Note:   
   Content may be edited for style and length.   
      
      
   ==========================================================================   
   Journal Reference:   
      1. Alicia Ravens, Cornelia N. Stacher-Ho"rndli, Jared Emery, Susan   
         Steinwand, Jason D. Shepherd, Christopher Gregg. Arc regulates   
         a second- guessing cognitive bias during naturalistic foraging   
         through effects on discrete behavior modules. iScience, 2023; 26   
         (5): 106761 DOI: 10.1016/ j.isci.2023.106761   
   ==========================================================================   
      
   Link to news story:   
   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/05/230524181833.htm   
      
   --- up 1 year, 12 weeks, 2 days, 10 hours, 50 minutes   
    * Origin: -=> Castle Rock BBS <=- Now Husky HPT Powered! (1:317/3)   
   SEEN-BY: 15/0 106/201 114/705 123/120 153/7715 218/700 226/30 227/114   
   SEEN-BY: 229/110 112 113 307 317 400 426 428 470 664 700 291/111 292/854   
   SEEN-BY: 298/25 305/3 317/3 320/219 396/45   
   PATH: 317/3 229/426